I like the idea of champs games for those who attained everything, but should maybe Champs be a slight variant of the game, similar to WaI where Champs always only play hard? I could imagine 15 items per set, 75 or 80 per correct answer instead of the usual 100. There is a higher maximum potential, but this is offset by the longer time needed and the higher chance to go wrong.

This way, playing Champ would also be a reward, not just a burden - and with the modified score, any Mind Melt scores for stage games / challenges should remain comparably difficult when looking at the 2400-2800 range.

Thoughts from other pro Mind Melters?

Edited by WesleyCrusher (Wed Jun 12 201301:32 PM)

_________________________
FunTrivia Editor (Hobbies and Sci/Tech) and AdministratorGuardian of the Tower

If MM champs could only play in Difficult mode, would that negate the MM Daily Challenge which asks for X answers in any mode? This is what happens when I play WAI. I might be allowed to play in any mode for the challenge, but I seem to only be able to play in Timed mode.

Actually, the X answers challenge would likely be a freebie for a few times until it has adapted. In my hypothetical difficult mode, you can have up to 45 correct, so initially, 28 to 30 should be easy pie. Of course once you played a few times, it will adjust upwards to reflect your champ mode skill level.

_________________________
FunTrivia Editor (Hobbies and Sci/Tech) and AdministratorGuardian of the Tower

Wes, how would the scoring for team points be affected by your proposed modification? It's too early in the morning for me to think it through carefully. I play the game because I love it, and pit myself against the game, not against other players. The satisfaction of working it out would be even greater with more items to sort, but since I am already rather slow and rely on getting all 30 right (usually in 180-200 seconds) to have a good ranking and score for the team, I wouldn't want to see my slowness result in a lesser contribution to my team's score. How would 45 right in 270-300 seconds score as compared to what I now can expect to get?

45 x 75 = 3375, less 260 = 3115. Although I'd rather estimate 150-170 seconds (it's not a linear increase in time since you not only need to play more words but also scan more answers for each), so just over 3000.

_________________________
FunTrivia Editor (Hobbies and Sci/Tech) and AdministratorGuardian of the Tower

It was an idea to maybe increase interest in a champ game - I don't know if it could be made optional, but I'd like to play larger and thus tougher sets sometimes (some 10-sets can be solved by pure linguistics without any actual vocabulary knowledge: Pair the only adverbs, pair the only verbs, then identify the bone and drug by ending, and so on).

Larger groups could make this less frequent.

_________________________
FunTrivia Editor (Hobbies and Sci/Tech) and AdministratorGuardian of the Tower

My one gripe with standard champ games is they are strictly a disadvantage for champs (Lower placings) while not offering anything cool in return. They're great for the non-champs (who are the majority of players, so it's good to have them),but less so for those who won it all. Of course we could also alleviate this with a badge or two specifically for champs.

How about "Champ of Champs": Any top 10 place in a champs division (over all games) gets you some points, using the Formula 1 grid of 25-18-15-12-10-8-6-4-2-1, dailies double the amount. Catch 10,000 Champ points to win.

(This counts ALL Champion play, hourly and daily, even Expert. If you play Champ and get top 10, you score.)

Edited by WesleyCrusher (Wed Jun 12 201302:31 PM)

_________________________
FunTrivia Editor (Hobbies and Sci/Tech) and AdministratorGuardian of the Tower

If we were to do that with Mind Melt, though, wouldn't we have to put a badge or two in EVERY champs game, for fairness? I think that's adding a lot of unnecessary badges (as much as I'd LOVE to win the easy game one).

_________________________
"The only water in the forest is the River."

Yes, that was the idea. You want to be in as many champ games as you can to accelerate towards this badge, but you can get your first points even with one single measly expert win to your name (and thus get hooked for more )

Making it span all champs divisions keeps the number of badges under control and yet makes any additional champs rank something good to have since it will help you onward.

_________________________
FunTrivia Editor (Hobbies and Sci/Tech) and AdministratorGuardian of the Tower

I think it's a great idea to do something for champs rather than just sequestering us from the game and having us beat each other up (viz. Daily Game sets 11 & 12). I like the idea of Champ Points as outlined -- at least there's some benefit for continuing to play games where all the badges have been won.

How about "Champ of Champs": Any top 10 place in a champs division (over all games) gets you some points, using the Formula 1 grid of 25-18-15-12-10-8-6-4-2-1, dailies double the amount. Catch 10,000 Champ points to win.

I love the idea, and it is certainly time. But, I fully encourage having the 50,000 badge be part of the criteria. A lot of us got a bit screwed in WAI with having all of the rest of the badges and bumped to Champions, while others not winning the badges specifically as to get to the 50,000 badge before having to deal with the Champion group. It really has been a bit frustrating.